• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Professor Turley Lays Smack On Buckwheat

Mike

Well-known member
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/06/03/turley_obama_the_president_that_richard_nixon_always_wanted_to_be.html


WE TOLD YOU SO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Partisans like Turley are obviously trying to leverage this, so his "extremist Tea Party" win back the Senate, after they finish dying off... :lol:
 

Steve

Well-known member
Turley is a dang ol cultist if you ask me.. :lol: :roll:

Professor Turley is widely regarded as a champion of the rule of law, and his stated positions in many cases and his self-proclaimed "socially liberal agenda",[8] have led liberal and progressive thinkers to also consider him a champion for their causes, especially on issues such as separation of church and state, environmental law,[10][16] civil rights,[7][17] and the illegality of torture.[18][19][20] Politico has referred to Turley as a "liberal law professor and longtime civil libertarian".

In numerous appearances on Countdown with Keith Olbermann and The Rachel Maddow Show, he has called for criminal prosecution of Bush administration officials for war crimes, including torture.[22]

In USA Today in October 2004, he famously argued for the legalization of polygamy,

Commenting on the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which, he contends, does away with habeas corpus, Turley says, "It’s something that no one thought—certainly I didn’t think—was possible in the United States. And I am not too sure how we got to this point. But people clearly don’t realize what a fundamental change it is about who we are as a country. What happened today changed us."[20]

this is bad,.. not as bad as the ACLU standing up for gun rights,.. but really bad for the cult.. how dare he step out of line and criticize the king?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
And I agree with Turley. Just as this article points out- the power of the Executive Branch has been increasing since Reagans time- mainly because of a much more complicated world (terrorists and wars allowing uses of war powers act) combined with a Congress that has been partially or now totally dysfunctional because of partisanship (and now splits within the parties) and the inability/refusal to compromise on anything...
Weak or rubber stamp Congress's allow Presidents to gain more powers....


Presidential usage

The first president to issue a signing statement was James Monroe. Until the 1980s, with some exceptions, signing statements were generally triumphal, rhetorical, or political proclamations and went mostly unannounced. Until Ronald Reagan became President, only 75 statements had been issued; Reagan and his successors George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton produced 247 signing statements among the three of them. By the end of 2004, George W. Bush had issued 108 signing statements containing 505 constitutional challenges. As of January 30, 2008, he had signed 157 signing statements challenging over 1,100 provisions of federal law.

The upswing in the use of signing statements during the Reagan administration coincides with the writing by Samuel A. Alito — then a staff attorney in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel — of a 1986 memorandum making the case for "interpretive signing statements" as a tool to "increase the power of the Executive to shape the law." Alito proposed adding signing statements to a "reasonable number of bills" as a pilot project, but warned that "Congress is likely to resent the fact that the President will get in the last word on questions of interpretation."

A November 3, 1993 memo from White House Counsel Bernard Nussbaum explained the use of signing statements to object to potentially unconstitutional legislation:
"If the President may properly decline to enforce a law, at least when it unconstitutionally encroaches on his powers, then it arguably follows that he may properly announce to Congress and to the public that he will not enforce a provision of an enactment he is signing. If so, then a signing statement that challenges what the President determines to be an unconstitutional encroachment on his power, or that announces the President's unwillingness to enforce (or willingness to litigate) such a provision, can be a valid and reasonable exercise of Presidential authority."

This same Department of Justice memorandum observed that use of Presidential signing statements to create legislative history for the use of the courts was uncommon before the Reagan and Bush Presidencies. In 1986, Attorney General Edwin Meese III entered into an arrangement with the West Publishing Company to have Presidential signing statements published for the first time in the U.S. Code Congressional and Administrative News, the standard collection of legislative history.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
How will you stop "executive creep", without partisanship?

You didn't have a problem with "partisanship", when it came to Bush and the promises that were made to stop the "executive creep", did you OT?

But, now it is back to precedent, and the slippery slope, has all been forgotten, eh?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
How will you stop "executive creep", without partisanship?

You didn't have a problem with "partisanship", when it came to Bush and the promises that were made to stop the "executive creep", did you OT?

But, now it is back to precedent, and the slippery slope, has all been forgotten, eh?

Like I said -weak Congress's that can do nothing because of partisanship or rubber stamp Congress's both allow Presidents to gain more powers.... If these

But apparently neither party wants to lose those powers when they have their man in power... There were many many chances for the Congress to go directly to the Supreme Court and challenge GW on some of the signing statements- but they couldn't get enough folks together to agree to do so...Same with Obama... The only case I can remember the Repubs challenging Obama on a signing statement type issue is when the House took up the challenge to defend DOMA after Obama refused to-- and they lost that...
 

Latest posts

Top